Monitoring File Sharers More Prevalent Than Previously Thought

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm curious, wouldn't this be considered unlawful wiretapping under current laws? Not supporting piracy, but I'm curious of the legal ramifications of being spied on without a warrant.
 
Legal / illegal, these terms mean nothing, if you have an industry worth several billion dollars every year you will not care about legally pursuing people you will just collect IP addresses and mess with the offenders later
 
[citation][nom]master_chen[/nom]Move to Russia. No one cares about Internet Piracy here. >: )[/citation]
Yer, just don't piss Putin off. Or it's a permanent relocation to a rent free 4 walled concrete room 😀
 
OK, so PB has been monitored for 3 years and we have had how many people charged with illegal filesharing with this information used as evidence?
...
That's what I thought...
 
[citation][nom]phyco126[/nom]I'm curious, wouldn't this be considered unlawful wiretapping under current laws? Not supporting piracy, but I'm curious of the legal ramifications of being spied on without a warrant.[/citation]
I doubt there is such a thing as "privacy" on a peer-to-peer network where every node propagates everyone else's IP😛ort info to everyone else during normal operation. Anyone who connects to the tracker to request peers for your file has a chance to get your IP. Anyone who connects to peers for distributed tracking and requests peers for a file your are downloading is likely to get your IP😛ort as well.

Propagating everyone's IP😛ort is a fundamental part of BitTorrent's and any other P2P network operation.
 
[citation][nom]InvalidError[/nom]I doubt there is such a thing as "privacy" on a peer-to-peer network where every node propagates everyone else's IPort info to everyone else during normal operation.[/citation]
Kinda like "intimacy" in an orgy ;P.
 
When you run a red light the ticket goes to the driver not the owner of the car .Companies should be able to prove who actually downloaded the card not who actually owns the internet connection.
 
Magnet links have nothing to do with this... they aren't tracking who downloads a particular .torrent file; they are simply enumerating ALL the peers in a swarm of a particular torrent being "tracked".

In a sense all that really gives people is a somewhat accurate statistic as to how many copies of a particular "copyrighted work" are being downloaded, provided they find and track all the torrents / other means of dissemination.

At this point the "powers that be" know they cannot win the piracy war with the current tools they have on hand, so they study, they learn and eventually will adapt and roll out methods to be able to ferret out individual pirates better and bring them to court.

This is an arms race. They get better at tracking us, and we just get better at hiding. In the previous cases that I have looked at, so far I have not seen the system go after individuals that take measures to protect themselves (using proxies, peer blocks, public WiFi connections, etc.) but that may very well change in the future, or it may not. We shall see.
 
[citation][nom]master9716[/nom]When you run a red light the ticket goes to the driver not the owner of the car .Companies should be able to prove who actually downloaded the card not who actually owns the internet connection.[/citation]
Well if a red light camera catches you it will go the the owner of the car since they go by the plate numbers. If a cop pulls you over then the ticket goes to the driver, or they take the car if you are drunk and it's not yours.
 
I still don't understand how an IP address can equal a person in court. The vast majority of users have their computers behind a wireless router. My router may be secure now, but how can they prove that it was secure at the time the piracy took place. The entire concept of an IP address linking to a specific person needs to stop.

How does IPV6 affect this? Are individual machines still obfuscated behind a router with the 'new' standard?
 
thanks to ACTA, TPPA, Patriot Act and NDAA, this is all legal under whatever presumptuousness name they want to call it.

you already lost this battle by not voting against both democrats and republicans who signed these agreements

"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." -- Plato

“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.” -- Plato

“Just because you do not take an interest in politics, does not mean politics won't take an interest in you.” -- Pericles
Click to expand...
 
[citation][nom]spentshells[/nom]You are paying the government to spy on you, write in RON PAUl[/citation]
Ron Paul may have social issue right, but he's absolutely nuts when it comes to economic issues.
 
[citation][nom]ravewulf[/nom]Ron Paul may have social issue right, but he's absolutely nuts when it comes to economic issues.[/citation]

If the current estabilishment is what's considered sane. I'll take the insane anyday. The current two parties BOTH continuously squeeze us dry, sell us out, and run us further into debt every year. Obviously it's time for anything new.
 
[citation][nom]kinggraves[/nom]If the current estabilishment is what's considered sane. I'll take the insane anyday. The current two parties BOTH continuously squeeze us dry, sell us out, and run us further into debt every year. Obviously it's time for anything new.[/citation]
He's even further to the Right (economic issues) than Obama or Romney (unfortunately not on the chart in the link, but mentioned in the text). Meanwhile, I'm over in the Libertarian Left quadrant
http://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2012
 
[citation][nom]freggo[/nom]Let them collect IP addresses; then proof it is the correct one 🙂[/citation]
The corporate idiots have made their decision: now let them enforce it!
 
[citation][nom]phyco126[/nom]I'm curious, wouldn't this be considered unlawful wiretapping under current laws? Not supporting piracy, but I'm curious of the legal ramifications of being spied on without a warrant.[/citation]

One term: Patriot Act. With that, they can justify almost anything under the Aegis of "It's to prevent terrorism!"

Personally, I feel that the FBI should be required to get a warrant before they can do this kind of monitoring. For private organizations? It should be banned period or those organizations should be required to have a federal license and meet minimum standards.
 
[citation][nom]livebriand[/nom]The corporate idiots have made their decision: now let them enforce it![/citation]

Sorry to doublepost but I didn't see this one before.

Hell, not just prove that they have the right IP address, that they have the right goddamned person, since with wireless networks there can be more than one person in a home or a visitor who did the illegal downloading.

As to the "It's your connection and you are responsible!" BZZT! WRONG! I cannot monitor my internet connection 24/7 in order to make sure someone is not using it for illegal downloading. It's just impossible for me to do.
The best I can do is WPA2-password my network, then PRAY that someone doesn't download the numerous tools on the internet to crack those passwords and take the time to hack my network.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom